Fin.Times on Russia

FT.com site : Lest cold war ghosts impede history's
lessons.
FTCOM00020061125e2bo0003j
John Thornhill
868 Words
24 November 2006
Financial Times (FT.Com)
FTCOM
Financial Times - Print and Online
CTGFT
English
(c) 2006 The Financial Times Limited. All rights
reserved

A rogue Russian spy is killed in mysterious
circumstances in London.
Some of the Russian president's leading domestic
opponents are exiled,
imprisoned or murdered. The Kremlin, in the grip of a
steely former KGB
colonel, destabilises unfriendly neighbouring
countries, temporarily
severing gas supplies to Ukraine and bullying Georgia.

Is this the start of a new cold war?

A useful point of departure is Winston Churchill's
famous speech in
1946 at Fulton, Missouri, which was widely seen as
signalling the start of
the real cold war. The world has changed almost beyond
imagination in
the intervening 60 years; but some truths that
Churchill spoke that day
remain as valid as ever. Speaking freely, having been
voted out of
office the year before, Churchill warned the world of
the "expansive and
proselytising tendencies" of the Soviet Union under
Joseph Stalin. "From
Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an
iron curtain has
descended across the continent," he told his audience,
including his
host, President Harry Truman.

"Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient
states of central
and eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna,
Budapest, Belgrade,
Bucharest and Sofia, all these famous cities and
populations around
them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere, and
are all subject in one
form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a
very high and,
in many cases, increasing measure of control from
Moscow," he said.

Churchill went on to warn that the Soviet threat was
not confined to
Europe but was global thanks to the spread of
communist fifth columns
working in "complete unity and absolute obedience" to
directions from the
Kremlin. Strong Communist parties threatened to
undermine western
European countries, such as Italy and France, and
exploit the turmoil in the
far east, particularly in China. The west must unite
and strengthen
"the sinews of peace". His speech helped spur western
governments into
forming the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation in
1949, which deterred the
Soviet threat until the Soviet Union collapsed.

Modern-day Russia, however thuggish and brutal it may
seem on occasion,
bears scant resemblance to the Stalinist totalitarian
regime of the
1940s. First and foremost, Russia has lost its empire
after the peoples of
central and eastern Europe (and even the Soviet
Union's own republics)
liberated themselves from Moscow's yoke. Almost all
the capitals
mentioned by Churchill now proudly fly the European
Union flag. Nato will
next week hold a summit in Riga, the capital of
Latvia, which was forcibly
incorporated into the Soviet Union at the time that
Churchill spoke.

Second, militant communist ideology is dead. Russia
may be growing
worryingly nationalistic. But that nationalism is not
exportable and holds
no appeal for non-Russians in the way that communism
once did. The
communist economic model, which was once thought
capable of burying
capitalism, has proved defunct.

Moreover, Russia has long ago ceased to be
totalitarian. In some senses
the Russians, too, liberated themselves in 1991 when
the Soviet Union
fell apart. Russians today can can travel freely
abroad; access the
internet; buy their own property wherever they want
(including Chelsea
football club); and list their companies on foreign
stock markets.

But if the historical circumstances have changed
almost beyond
recognition, the advice Churchill gave Truman about
how to deal with Russia
remains just as relevant today.

First, Churchill acknowledged that the Russians were a
great people who
should shape their own destiny and play a role in the
world. The west
should always extend the hand of friendship to
Russians to the extent it
was welcomed, he said.

However, the former British leader was realistic
enough to know that
appeasement of an aggressive power would only invite
further
intimidation. "From what I have seen of our Russian
friends and allies during the
war, I am convinced that there is nothing they admire
so much as
strength, and there is nothing for which they have
less respect than
weakness," he said. "The safety of the world requires
a new unity in Europe,
from which no nation should be permanently outcast."

How should Europe respond today to a resurgent Russia?

As Churchill recommended, the west should remain open
to the Russian
people. Western European countries should, if
anything, ease visa
restrictions for Russian visitors and encourage young
Russians to study
abroad. EU countries should encourage mutually
beneficial business, financial
and cultural ties wherever possible.

However, Europe must remain united in the face of any
intimidation and
not allow the Kremlin to play one country off against
another. EU
countries should reduce their dependence on Russian
energy supplies if
Moscow is going to regard them as a political tool.
They should continue to
denounce human rights abuses in Chechnya - and
elsewhere - as being
incompatible with the standards of the international
organisations to
which Russia belongs. And Britain should be firm in
prosecuting whoever is
responsible for Alexander Litvinenko's death, no
matter where the
investigation leads.

This is not a return of the cold war; but it may prove
to be an
increasingly hot peace.

The writer is the FT's European edition editor